岛屿领土上的精英定居点:通往新喀里多尼亚和波多黎各具有约束力的政治地位公投的道路

IF 1.7 2区 社会学 Q2 GEOGRAPHY
Alberto M. Burgos-Rivera
{"title":"岛屿领土上的精英定居点:通往新喀里多尼亚和波多黎各具有约束力的政治地位公投的道路","authors":"Alberto M. Burgos-Rivera","doi":"10.24043/isj.398","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"New Caledonia and Puerto Rico are two non-sovereign island territories of France and the United States respectively. Both territories have historically centered their political debate on the definition of their political status and have done so by implementing numerous referendums. Of the two territories, however, only New Caledonia has managed to establish a binding referendum on political status. This raises the following question: How has New Caledonia managed to obtain a binding referendum on its political status while Puerto Rico has failed to do so? One variable present in New Caledonia, but not in Puerto Rico, was the convening of both the metropolitan and territorial political elite with regards to the territory’s change in political status as well as the definition of each status option. While elite theory has been used as a theoretical framework to explain democratization, this article discusses the role of elite settlements with regards to changes in political status among non-sovereign island jurisdictions. I focus on two key events in both case studies. In New Caledonia, I focus on the signing of the Matignon and Nouméa Accords, 1988 and 1998 respectively, while in Puerto Rico I focus on the Plebiscitary Process of 1989-1991.","PeriodicalId":51674,"journal":{"name":"Island Studies Journal","volume":"47 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2022-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Elite settlements in island territories: The road to a binding political status referendum in New Caledonia and Puerto Rico\",\"authors\":\"Alberto M. Burgos-Rivera\",\"doi\":\"10.24043/isj.398\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"New Caledonia and Puerto Rico are two non-sovereign island territories of France and the United States respectively. Both territories have historically centered their political debate on the definition of their political status and have done so by implementing numerous referendums. Of the two territories, however, only New Caledonia has managed to establish a binding referendum on political status. This raises the following question: How has New Caledonia managed to obtain a binding referendum on its political status while Puerto Rico has failed to do so? One variable present in New Caledonia, but not in Puerto Rico, was the convening of both the metropolitan and territorial political elite with regards to the territory’s change in political status as well as the definition of each status option. While elite theory has been used as a theoretical framework to explain democratization, this article discusses the role of elite settlements with regards to changes in political status among non-sovereign island jurisdictions. I focus on two key events in both case studies. In New Caledonia, I focus on the signing of the Matignon and Nouméa Accords, 1988 and 1998 respectively, while in Puerto Rico I focus on the Plebiscitary Process of 1989-1991.\",\"PeriodicalId\":51674,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Island Studies Journal\",\"volume\":\"47 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Island Studies Journal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.24043/isj.398\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"GEOGRAPHY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Island Studies Journal","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.24043/isj.398","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"GEOGRAPHY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

新喀里多尼亚和波多黎各分别是法国和美国的两个非主权岛屿领土。历史上,这两个领土的政治辩论一直以确定其政治地位为中心,并通过多次公民投票来实现这一目标。然而,在这两个领土中,只有新喀里多尼亚设法就政治地位举行了有约束力的公民投票。这就提出了以下问题:新喀里多尼亚如何设法就其政治地位举行有约束力的公民投票,而波多黎各却未能这样做?新喀里多尼亚存在但波多黎各不存在的一个变数是,就领土政治地位的变化以及每种地位选择的定义召集大都市和领土的政治精英。虽然精英理论被用作解释民主化的理论框架,但本文讨论了精英定居点在非主权岛屿司法管辖区政治地位变化方面的作用。在这两个案例研究中,我主要关注两个关键事件。在新喀里多尼亚,我的重点是分别签署1988年和1998年的《马提尼翁协定》和《努姆卡马协定》,而在波多黎各,我的重点是1989-1991年的全民投票进程。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Elite settlements in island territories: The road to a binding political status referendum in New Caledonia and Puerto Rico
New Caledonia and Puerto Rico are two non-sovereign island territories of France and the United States respectively. Both territories have historically centered their political debate on the definition of their political status and have done so by implementing numerous referendums. Of the two territories, however, only New Caledonia has managed to establish a binding referendum on political status. This raises the following question: How has New Caledonia managed to obtain a binding referendum on its political status while Puerto Rico has failed to do so? One variable present in New Caledonia, but not in Puerto Rico, was the convening of both the metropolitan and territorial political elite with regards to the territory’s change in political status as well as the definition of each status option. While elite theory has been used as a theoretical framework to explain democratization, this article discusses the role of elite settlements with regards to changes in political status among non-sovereign island jurisdictions. I focus on two key events in both case studies. In New Caledonia, I focus on the signing of the Matignon and Nouméa Accords, 1988 and 1998 respectively, while in Puerto Rico I focus on the Plebiscitary Process of 1989-1991.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.30
自引率
26.70%
发文量
29
审稿时长
6 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信